Forum - View topicCharacter Portrayals: Anime vs. Real Life.
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Shichimi
 Posts: 349 |
|
|||
|
Uh, yeah. Sorry guys, I couldn't think of a more concise title.
Through the Kodomo no Jikan discussion thread, I ended up wondering how people felt about the difference between real life and anime characters, especially when it comes to children. I'll reiterate the question here:
Please note the emboldened sentence there; if I could light it up in bright, sparkling neon I would. I'm not interested in whether people think a certain show is filth, or what have you. I'm interested in whether people have differing levels of tolerance for content in anime VS content in real life, and if so, why? The forum rules state it's good manners to present your own views, so here goes. My personal measure of if I'll watch anything involving young characters in anime is asking if I'd watch it in real life. One of my favourite shows is Strawberry Marshmallow, and I don't think there is anything contentious in there. Certainly no sexualisation of any kind.
I guess this brings up an interesting issue; that of how the show is marketed. Again, going back to Strawberry Marshmallow I am aware that there is some insanely skeezy promotional material out there for the show. I think it has also been mentioned that when this show aired in Japan, its timeslot was not one which would be conducive to family viewing. This is extremely saddening, as it seems as though the creators of this harmless, fun show felt that in order to get asses on seats they had to pander somewhat to the loli crowd. I can remember my own annoyance when the fantastic Simoun was shunted under the 'Yuri Fan' label. 
Again, in big emboldened boldness, this is not a dig at loli or yuri fans (Kashimashi is a great manga)! My contention is that this could limit the number of people willing to try a series. Should the way that a show is marketed matter? I'm really not sure about this; I think in principle it shouldn't but it sure as hell does annoy me, if only because it could dissuade people from trying out certain shows. Please also don't limit yourselves to just talking about children in anime; what would your reaction be to a real-life Belldandy for example? I would really like to hear people's opinions on this, and hope that we are all mature and sensible enough to discuss this without the thread devolving into mudslinging and childish insults! 
|
||||
|
||||
HaruhiToy
 Posts: 4118 |
|
|||
|
I think you are maybe overworking this topic a bit. I am not even sure of what you are asking.
Does the anime industry pander to (or target) pedophiles? Looking at the evidence -- the product and the promotion -- I don't see how any reasonable argument can be formed that it doesn't. Clearly it does. And to be clear, we aren't talking about hentai. We are talking about mainstream titles and it is a matter of degree. They even joke about it openly. Recall in the sub-feature "Lucky Channel" of Lucky Star, at one point in an early episode Akira grumbles, "I still have the pedophile market." So should the practice be stopped or banned or something? Again, I can't see any reasonable argument for how that can be done, let alone if it should be. Is doing it in anime the same as doing it with live-action photography? That's more of a grey area, and I come down on the side that it the anime form is harmless. The only serious argument against that revolves around the theory that the depiction of cartoon exploitation of children somehow promotes exploitation of real children, so the freedom of expression is outweighed by damage done to those individual children, wherever they exist. Although there are vehement promoters of that position, they are so far a minority in most countries. (The Philippines seems to be an exception just now.) Yet even in "permissive" countries like the U.S. it is possible to get prosecuted for owning certain images of fictional people. The final question is: should I be buying/enjoying this stuff that is sold to pedophiles and has material in it they enjoy? I'm not a pedophile! Well -- doesn't that depend on a) what else is in that material and b) whether that outweighs the stuff you don't like? It is a rare anime that doesn't have something in it you don't like. I don't see any reason to lose your head because that something is related to a fact of life you don't like or have no interest in. I hope any of that was what you were looking for. |
||||
|
||||
gundam83
 Posts: 93 Location: Caribbean |
|
|||
|
I don't entertain myself with something that I would find disgusting in real life,that's just me. To me its hypocritical. That's my opinion.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Shichimi
Posts: 349 |
|
|||
Ah, sorry about that. What I mean, simply, is: Do you have different standards of what you will tolerate/accept in anime, compared to real life? So I mentioned Belldandy briefly. In anime, the trope of a doting and motherly girl who never seems to have a bad word to say is well known and accepted. Would it be quite so easy to accept if we were talking about a character in a live-action series? Why? Hope that clears it up. As for the rest of your post, yes I agree; it shouldn't really matter how the show is marketed (although it could be offputting to some), it should be judged on its actual content alone. |
||||
|
||||
Zin5ki
 Posts: 6680 Location: London, UK |
|
|||
|
This matter is quite straightforward. As presented, there exists a great degree of dissimilarity between images from an anime and photographic images (or the perception of real events). As such, a viewer of anime can never mistake what they see for a non-fictional person. This being the case, the viewer shall be quite sound in their belief that what they witness comes at nobody's expense.
Granting that many folk hold certain moral sentiments towards taking pleasure from the expense of others, where "others" denotes particular actual persons and not mere concepts of unactualised persons, the matter of what they see in anime needn't violate any principle deriving from such moral sentiments, allowing them to respond to these fictions as they desire without hesitation. (In case of a photographic depiction however, any such desires would naturally conflict with the aforementioned moral principles. Of course, such cases are not the ones under present scrutiny.) There are two ways by which this difference between cases could become complicated. Firstly, the case of a lifelike and arguably photographic depiction, in which the viewer cannot soundly believe they witness a purely fictional act. Such a case can be discarded for practical purposes, so long as we concern visual works that are not as lifelike as this. Secondly, the case of those to whom the matter of whether a given depiction is clearly fictional bears no relevance to the moral sentiment they feel towards the depiction. I dare say that these people bear certain psychological dissimilarities to the sort of person I have described above, but it is not for me to postulate why this might be. gundam83 appears to be one of such people. Such a user has made the claim that taking pleasure in the depiction of a fictional act, one that would disgust one if witnessed as an actual happening, is hypocritical. This presents itself as a challenge to the first sort of person I have outlined. I am not of a belief that this point is viable unless particular moral norms are rigidly adhered to, though there may perhaps be a credible argument in its favour. As such, I challenge those who make this claim of hypocrisy to present such an argument. I can proceed no further until one is provided. |
||||
|
||||
ArmchairTitan
 Posts: 34 Location: Shropshire, UK |
|
|||
|
This is one of those sensitive topics that can easily rouse negativity as a knee-jerk reaction, so I'll try to approach this objectively.
As a general rule, anime in the variety we are discussing here (slice-of-life, service, yuri etc) often depict extremely idealised characters to suit to tastes of the viewer. I like to believe that watchers understand this principal - The characters are absurdly unrealistic. They do not look or act like real people; they are a construct of pleasing facets designed specifically to entertain their target audience. Does this mean that viewers are going to mistake anime for real life, or expect actual human beings to act in the same way as someone they saw on screen? I should hope not. I would expect the same from any entertainment medium: Do watchers of slasher flicks suddenly become murderers? Do players of GTA want to steal cars? I'm going to say that, for the general populace, no. So then, to cover your original point, what about 'loli' service characters? I do not believe that fans of loli mistake the characters on-screen for an actual depiction of a child. Those sorts of boundaries are solid mechanisms in the brain of any normal adult. If somebody has a mental issue that causes them to expect reality to imitate fiction then it is not the material that is at fault... wouldn't they also make the same mistake with police drama, violent computer games, even art? Of course, as already mentioned, merchandising can certainly cross many lines in terms of taste. However, my point still stands: They are figures... or pictures, characters, books and so on. Fiction is fiction, reality is reality. I believe it is the responsibility of the viewer to understand that, not a job for someone else to decide for them. |
||||
|
||||
|
HaruhiToy
Posts: 4118 |
|
|||
So what would you say to CGI that is so high-res and artfully done that you couldn't tell it from the real thing without instrumentation? Perhaps not even then. Would that cross the line? If so, then there is a line and where would you draw it? Who gets to decide? |
||||
|
||||
|
Shichimi
Posts: 349 |
|
|||
|
That's my question, pretty much, and I think it's pointless for people to step in and try to give a definitive answer. Everyone will have their own personal take on this, and that's what I'd like to hear.
I am inclined to agree with Zin5ki that there is a clear delineation between fantasy and reality, and if viewers find otherwise that's their failing. However, if I am told repeatedly by a show that 'this is a small child' or 'this is how a girl should act' or even 'this is how people of a certain nationality behave' then what am I to do? Although characters may be portrayed in a completely unrealistic manner, within the show's internal logic they are still clearly identified as being that thing. Going with Belldandy again, it's not seen as strange (or worrying, even) that a girl would behave in such a subservient and meek way. Is it dishonest to say on one hand 'These characters are obviously not really what they portray', whilst the show consistently points out that in actual fact they are? 
Last edited by Shichimi on Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:29 am; edited 2 times in total |
||||
|
||||
Skylark
 Posts: 827 Location: ORE NO TSHIRT |
|
|||
|
I recently had a minor discussion with abunai in the School Days thread on this topic, but rather than involving loli characters; thinking in terms of morality. The subject matter was Makoto and I pointed out that as an anime character I was very satisfied with his spoiler[gruesome death] and felt he completely got what he deserved. Would I have the same reaction if I saw a news piece on something like this? Or if I had a relative that was a complete dick like him, would I wish this kind of thing on him? The answer, of course, is no.
Enjoying Kotonoha spoiler[exact revenge on Makoto] felt perversely quite enjoyable. Does this mean there is a hidden serial killer locked away inside me, kept in only because I don't want to be bothered with something like jail time? If people weren't held accountable for their actions, would they take pleasure in real life in the same way they exact enjoyment from watching anime? I don't think there was anyone who felt sorrow for Yagami Light spoiler[as he was shot to death], so does this mean we too would like nothing more than to shoot someone we hate? And yet, not everyone does shoot someone they hate, and I don't think you can point the finger at entertainment for the few instances where it might be related. Are you telling me, gundam83, that you've never enjoyed a horror/slasher flick, or a story where the good guy kills the bad guys, or anything like that? Because that right there is a double standard in my opinion. Wishing death on a fictional character, I think, is the same as objectifying an underage female anime character sexually (because lets face it, anime loli characters have absolutely nothing in common with actual pre teen and young teenage girls). Sure, you could argue that it's an abstract representation of a child and that the intentions are the same as if it were a real child, Except that every aspect of said loli character, every single trait, right down to the smooth skin, perfect features and pretty, long hair was designed and/or scripted by an adult. Not to mention, as I already said, anime characters (male/female of any age) don't really look anything like actual people. They share features, sure; they have eyes, ears, nose, mouth, hair, arms, legs etc but they might as well be aliens for all they look like a flesh and blood person. As ArmchairTitan stated, it's up to each individual to make the distinction between reality and fiction; I don't really think too many people can't make that distinction. It kind of reminded me of when a Koi Kaze debate was rolling around. A lot of people supported the couple in the series, due I think to very good writing making the watcher become emotionally attached to the two and doing a good job of obscuring the very values society holds about this kind of relationship, and making the viewer think twice about whether or not persecuting this kind of relationship is really fair or correct. But it made me think to myself; if this were a story, full blown in the media, how do you think you would react then? The media would surely scorn such a couple and make the relationship out to be an aggressor/victim relationship, or some such. Readers would almost certainly frown upon it. I like where I stand, I think. For me, anime is purely fiction, and any emotions I feel while watching have probably been designed by someone paid to manipulate them through the medium. I don't feel guilty, I just go along for the ride. That said, I can't say that anime hasn't influenced my real life values. But I'm not marrying either of my sisters any time soon, or find a young girl and rape her, or go on a shooting spree. Yet I saw and loved Koi Kaze, have seen the Kodomo no Jikan anime and read the manga, and I play GTA4 and Prototype regularly. Another thing that I've said before, too, is this: if you do take the argument that people who sexualise girls in anime might go and try to reenact their favourite doujin in real life, then you should be prepared to admit that potential rapists might find satisfaction with said doujin, where if it were banned they might turn to the uglier option. Some lonely guy batting over a comic isn't hurting anyone, seriously. Out of interest, my country is known to be one of the more paranoid for this kind of thing; straight out of wikipedia:
I mean, the simpsons?? I've had plenty of those stupid simpsons sex gifs sent to me by email, and I've had a laugh then trashed them. Can I go to jail for that? One thing's for sure, I'm going to have to be very careful about any series I import. Hell some of the visual novel's I've read (eg ONE) would probably land me in deep shit here. But the point where I really feel like my rights to view regular pornography are getting trodden on is right here:
This on top of the internet censorship thing... ok now I'm just whinging about the Australian government's policies, but it's vaguely relevant. Last edited by Skylark on Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:39 am; edited 2 times in total |
||||
|
||||
|
ArmchairTitan
Posts: 34 Location: Shropshire, UK |
|
|||
That depends on what the CGI child was doing. If you are referring to the sexual connotations of 'loli', and the CGI depiction was so realistic that it was indistinguishable from reality then it would no longer be covered by my definition above. It would specifically be a simulation of a real human being, as opposed to a ficticious caricature. In fact, I believe such artwork is already covered under "digital child pornography" in US law, 1466A. OBSCENE VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF THE SEXUAL ABUSE OF CHILDREN. '(b) Additional offenses. Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly possesses a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that-- (1) (A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and (B) is obscene' '(f) Definitions. For purposes of this section-- (1) the term "visual depiction" includes undeveloped film and videotape, and data stored on a computer disk or by electronic means which is capable of conversion into a visual image, and also includes any photograph, film, video, picture, digital image or picture, computer image or picture, or computer generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means;' |
||||
|
||||
|
HaruhiToy
Posts: 4118 |
|
|||
OK, then. Who gets to decide what is "realistic" and what is not? Then suppose you find an offending image that is fictional yet so "realistic" that you consider it actionable under the law. Suppose you then tell the artist to put in some detail that makes it "unrealistic" such as putting a third eye on one of the characters. Does that mean the rest of the content of the picture then becomes acceptable? Why? |
||||
|
||||
|
Skylark
Posts: 827 Location: ORE NO TSHIRT |
|
|||
None of this is relevant at all. We're not discussing potential realistic CGI, we're talking about separating real from fiction in anime. ANIME. You can't tell me that you think anime characters really look like people. They are the artistic definition of a fictional person, the representations of a character that someone thought up, transformed from thought to paper via pen. Unless you've seen some hyper-realistic anime character that I don't know about? In any case as far as I can see, as long as an individual can separate fiction from reality in what they're seeing than the material is fine no matter how realistically portrayed. I'll use a previous example - the violence in GTA 4 is incredibly detailed and realistic. But people still know that it isn't real, no one is saying to themselves "well it's ok in the game so I'm going to go out and do it in real life". It's not any government's job to solicit the thoughts in people's heads, or any of their fantasies, no matter how farfetched. It's up to each individual to separate one from another. |
||||
|
||||
DuskyPredator
 Posts: 15594 Location: Brisbane, Australia |
|
|||
|
I think I do have different for with anime compared to real life. I would have to with some of the things I have seen, for example some parts that have included underage girls in some provocative manner where I am less worried about it in anime, but disgusted at real life examples.
I do worry that even some manga and anime that might be taken as bad by my own country, of which Australia has very strict rules. Like Rosario + Vampire or Hayate the Combat Butler manga which has at times young characters in provocatitive poses, the problem I mostly have is what others would think. I can pretty clearly diferentiat reality and fiction, when I first got into anime though I had a bit of a shock with things, like I felt really creepy watching Moon Phase. Now it does not affect me as much, though I am still aware of how others can perceive it. For record I am also a fan of violent video games, yet I have no urges to run around with a gun, or hack people with pointy objects. |
||||
|
||||
|
Shichimi
Posts: 349 |
|
|||
|
I too adore violent videogames, and consistently laugh my ass off whilst running over people in GTA, or reducing bad guys to mincemeat in Ninja Gaiden. I've never felt any qualms about this. This view is pretty much in diametric opposition to how I perceive anime VS real life.
The only explanation I can think of is this: in videogames such as GTA, the world is an even greater abstraction of reality than anime. When the level of abstraction reduces, then my propensity - and amusement - in behaving like a psychopath drops sharply. In games such as Oblivion and Fable, I find it nigh on impossible to do anything that could be considered bad. This doesn't mean that I dislike gory violence in anime; Helsing is a gloriously entertaining spectacle, and Rin is schlocky nonsense done right. However, watching both these series, I will continuously wince, or feel slightly nauseous. With videogames, it's no real reaction at all (unless, as I stated, the developers have made some credible effort to add depth to the game world's NPCs). |
||||
|
||||
EireformContinent
 Posts: 977 Location: Łódź/Poland (The Promised Land) |
|
|||
It depends on quality of the anime/manga. I don't have a list of forbidden topics that can't be shown, but the more controversial and delicate topic need more talented artists and more work to describe them. Here we come: I hate laziness. I really don't like situation when I see that author didn't make proper research or didn't pay enough effort to make his work. I can accept every strange thing if it's shown in convincing way. Unfortunately, those who can do it, are minority. For example Ryiko Ikeda in her works was witting about as difficult things as transsexualism, narcotics, lethal diseases, homosexual love and gender stereotypes and I think that she described them better than lots of good novelists-but she is an exception. Unfortunately, that kind of topic usually seems to be added because author didn't want to focus on topic itself- that kind of things usually make an impression of "glued" to make things controversial. For example- I wonder if KnJ's author knew how the children think and behave and didn't make anything to make their actions realistic. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group